Prospective Evaluation of Magnetic Resonance Imaging and [18F]Fluorodeoxyglucose Positron Emission Tomography-Computed Tomography at Diagnosis and Before Maintenance Therapy in Symptomatic Patients With Multiple Myeloma Included in the IFM/DFCI 2009 Trial: Results of the IMAJEM Study.

Purpose Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and positron emission tomography-computed tomography (PET-CT) are important imaging techniques in multiple myeloma (MM). We conducted a prospective trial in patients with MM aimed at comparing MRI and PET-CT with respect to the detection of bone lesions at diagnosis and the prognostic value of the techniques. Patients and Methods One hundred thirty-four patients received a combination of lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (RVD) with or without autologous stem-cell transplantation, followed by lenalidomide maintenance. PET-CT and MRI were performed at diagnosis, after three cycles of RVD, and before maintenance therapy. The primary end point was the detection of bone lesions at diagnosis by MRI versus PET-CT. Secondary end points included the prognostic impact of MRI and PET-CT regarding progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results At diagnosis, MRI results were positive in 127 of 134 patients (95%), and PET-CT results were positive in 122 of 134 patients (91%; P = .33). Normalization of MRI after three cycles of RVD and before maintenance was not predictive of PFS or OS. PET-CT became normal after three cycles of RVD in 32% of the patients with a positive evaluation at baseline, and PFS was improved in this group (30-month PFS, 78.7% v 56.8%, respectively). PET-CT normalization before maintenance was described in 62% of the patients who were positive at baseline. This was associated with better PFS and OS. Extramedullary disease at diagnosis was an independent prognostic factor for PFS and OS, whereas PET-CT normalization before maintenance was an independent prognostic factor for PFS. Conclusion There is no difference in the detection of bone lesions at diagnosis when comparing PET-CT and MRI. PET-CT is a powerful tool to evaluate the prognosis of de novo myeloma.

[1]  B. Line,et al.  Comparison of imaging with FDG PET/CT with other imaging modalities in myeloma , 2006, Skeletal Radiology.

[2]  H. Goldschmidt,et al.  International Myeloma Working Group consensus criteria for response and minimal residual disease assessment in multiple myeloma. , 2016, The Lancet. Oncology.

[3]  Hans Erik Johnsen,et al.  International Myeloma Working Group updated criteria for the diagnosis of multiple myeloma. , 2014, The Lancet. Oncology.

[4]  S. Schoenberg,et al.  Whole-body MRI versus whole-body MDCT for staging of multiple myeloma. , 2008, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[5]  D. Hose,et al.  Dynamic Contrast-Enhanced Magnetic Resonance Imaging for Assessment of Antiangiogenic Treatment Effects in Multiple Myeloma , 2014, Clinical Cancer Research.

[6]  B. Pégourié,et al.  Front-line transplantation program with lenalidomide, bortezomib, and dexamethasone combination as induction and consolidation followed by lenalidomide maintenance in patients with multiple myeloma: a phase II study by the Intergroupe Francophone du Myélome. , 2014, Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

[7]  M. Beksac,et al.  European Myeloma Network Guidelines for the Management of Multiple Myeloma-related Complications , 2015, Haematologica.

[8]  N. Munshi,et al.  Lenalidomide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone with Transplantation for Myeloma , 2017, The New England journal of medicine.

[9]  M. Beksac,et al.  International uniform response criteria for multiple myeloma , 2006, Leukemia.

[10]  R. Fanin,et al.  A prospective comparison of 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography-computed tomography, magnetic resonance imaging and whole-body planar radiographs in the assessment of bone disease in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma. , 2007, Haematologica.

[11]  M. Fenchel,et al.  Whole-body diffusion-weighted MRI with apparent diffusion coefficient mapping for early response monitoring in multiple myeloma: preliminary results. , 2011, AJR. American journal of roentgenology.

[12]  B. Barlogie,et al.  Prognostic implications of serial 18-fluoro-deoxyglucose emission tomography in multiple myeloma treated with total therapy 3. , 2013, Blood.

[13]  R. Fanin,et al.  Prognostic relevance of 18-F FDG PET/CT in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma patients treated with up-front autologous transplantation. , 2011, Blood.

[14]  T. Derlin,et al.  Diagnostic performance of whole-body MRI for the detection of persistent or relapsing disease in multiple myeloma after stem cell transplantation , 2012, European Radiology.

[15]  C. Nanni,et al.  Image interpretation criteria for FDG PET/CT in multiple myeloma: a new proposal from an Italian expert panel. IMPeTUs (Italian Myeloma criteria for PET USe) , 2016, European Journal of Nuclear Medicine and Molecular Imaging.

[16]  B. Barlogie,et al.  Standard and novel imaging methods for multiple myeloma: correlates with prognostic laboratory variables including gene expression profiling data , 2013, Haematologica.

[17]  B. Barlogie,et al.  F18-fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography in the context of other imaging techniques and prognostic factors in multiple myeloma. , 2009, Blood.

[18]  M. Dimopoulos,et al.  The Role of Imaging in the Treatment of Patients With Multiple Myeloma in 2016. , 2016, American Society of Clinical Oncology educational book. American Society of Clinical Oncology. Annual Meeting.